Boy, the chatter is loud on the Britney Spears on VMA performance of "Gimme More."
I didn't watch the VMA awards. I didn't even know it was on. I never watch it. Oh, celebrities patting themselves on their overpaid and arrogant backs yet again. (Yawn.) But as I was visiting some of my regular blog haunts, I saw posts here and there. I went over to YOUTUBE to see if it was the disaster the blogvine says it was.
Well, okay, it was bad.
It was bad for many reasons:
1. A tedious song. Not that Britney was known for great music, mind you. But this one was really, kinda pathetic. It should do well in gyms, though. I can see it useful for exercising, but why you'd want to play it on your car radio, I dunno.
2. Another hootchie mama performance from another female performer. One more amidst the multitudes. Despite sufficient good looks and talent to carry the day, Shakira and Beyonce insist on making themselves pure sex objects when they don't have to. A real pity. So, Britney, less talented, but still hot enough to get plenty of males fantasizing, can't seem to just be cute and sing. No, got to faux-hump all over the stage.
Women as sex objects in the music industry: nothing new, I know. But doing the ho-down so POORLY? It's like regression from an already regressed state.
Britney, a young woman with a fair share of good looks, a huge fortune, success, and two healthy babies (ie, a woman who should be very grateful for what-all she has) looks in the performance like a textbook case of jadedness, of ennui. She looks bored. Listless. Maybe it's just a very bad hangover. Still, she looks like she doesn't care. She looks like she is going through the motions, poorly (At least before, she went through the slutty motions with enthusiasm and on the beat.)
(Note: One of the blogvine says she was out clubbing til 3:00 am, which makes this performance seem like a hungover one on little sleep, yep.)
3. The trashy blonde wig: Okay, the using-a-wig deal, that I understand. When you've had a meltdown and shaved off all your hair--and look really UNglamorous without hair, unlike some celebs who look great bald--cosmetic measures must be taken prior to national fake-performing. But if you're gonna go on tv and you need a wig, why do you get one with big ole dark roots, one that looks dirty and stringy? Maybe it was part of the whole hootchie-hooker-momma look. (That black underwear was the sole cover-up above the knee. It's like she forgot to put on her costume or something.)
Dang. Bad hair on purpose? I didn't think we gals did that. Okay, we don't. NOrmally.
I dunno. I see this girl who just seems to be self-destructing and who should not have gone on TV. Someone decided, yeah, let's put the hungover, underdressed wench out there for entertainment. Someone who had to have noticed that she could barely talk or walk (in the video, she's clearly unsteady and barely opens her lips to, er, synch.)
I will say in her defense that the gal is NOT fat.
I'm tired of the "Look how out of shape she is" carping and wailing. It's what makes anorexics of celebrities and regular gals. No, Britney is NOT fat. Britney may not be the thinnest she's been or the most gym-toned ever, but she is not a bag of blubber on that stage. Yes, the listless movements, the bad lip-synching, and the ho outfit deserve criticism. But let's not get on the fatphobic thing here.
I wish her family would just have an intervention-a-day-athon or something. This gal is scaring me. The fact that she's been a role model for young gals scares me. That she has two boys of very young and impressionable ages worries me. (That Kevin Federline seems the saner parent is spooky.)
And that the VMA people let her go on like that makes me mad.
Ratings above all, even sheer common sense and a bit of good judgment, I guess. Even if it means taking advantage of a trainwreck celebrity who, clearly, just can't make good decisions at the moment about anything.
Okay, rant over.
I'm clearly in " a mood."